Charlie Shrem Pleads Guilty - What do you think?

[QuestionAuthority]

http://www.coinfinance.com/news/charlie-shrem-pleads-guilty

I know all of you are aware of this news already. I'm interested in what you think about it.

Should he have plead guilty? Fight for Bitcoin rights and become a martyr in prison or save himself?
Was a crime really committed or is this just a government attack on Bitcoin?
Was this a "scare" prosecution to make the rest of us "behave"?
Do you believe if he is guilty of the crimes accused he should pay for his actions? (the govt is right)
Do you think part of his "deal" includes selling out his friends, partners and clients?
Was this because there was already an ongoing investigation of Silk Road and he was unlucky enough to be dealing with them?
Do you know any insider info about what's really happening?

Here's my take on it. I like Charlie. I bought some stuff from him when he was selling in the marketplace on this forum. I had a problem with my order and he quickly made it right. I think he's a cool guy that fucked up. I don't think he sold anyone out. I think prosecutors like to put things to bed quickly so they make offers that are too good to be true that way they don't have to go to court. I think they had been looking at Silk Road for a long time and he was just a small part of that investigation.

I know people hate self moderated threads so I purposely didn't make this one. However, this isn't meant to be Charlie's public crucifixion so please be civil. You don't have to slander the man to state your opinion, he's been through enough.

[tins]

He took the lesser crime to avoid a long possible sentence.
I'd think most of us, if put in his position, would be forced to do the same thing.

[ANTIcentralized]

Was this a scare prosecution? - probably yes. The government has wanted to make an example of large players in the bitcoin world to discourage people from using bitcoin for illegal purposes.

Is he actually guilty? - technically yes. Although the reason he is guilty is really only because he did not reasonably gather the identity of the people he was selling bitcoin to. If he made a better effort to gain the identity of his buyers of bitcoin then he would not be guilty. The government really has him on nothing more then a technicality.

Do you think part of his "deal" includes selling out his friends, partners and clients? - based on the indictment it looks like the government thinks he acted alone. The fact that he is/was the CEO of bitinstant would likely mean that he is the highest ranking person in this "crime"

[WhatTheGox]

im sure he wasnt thrilled about pleading guilty

[tins]

im sure he wasnt thrilled about pleading guilty

When it came down to it, he had to think about the possibility of going away for a decade or longer. Gotta think about family first, always take the sure thing and the slap on the wrist versus possibly walking away scott free, but also possibly going away for a long, long time.

[Mieehayii]

that is normal behavior

[Soros Shorts]

So what is the maximum sentence for "aiding and abetting an unlicensed money transmitter"? Seems pretty mild compared to the original charges so I am not surprised he took the deal. Unfortunately this also means that a court won't be considering the legality of a company like BitInstant. From what I remembered they'd made some effort to remain legit.

[runam0k]

I think he was (technically) guilty and others will learn from his mistakes.

I assume he's banned from working in the money-transmitter space.  Is he banned from operating Bitcoin businesses generally?

[TrailingComet]

I am guessing he pled guilty to avoid being hit with more severe charges
Then again, maybe I watch too many US law and order shows!

[Darude Sandstorm]

I'm sure he only plead guilty because that was his only option. Plead not guilty and he'd probably get a hell of a lot longer. What has the other guy pleaded?

[maurya78]

Smells like a 12th hour deal was struck to give him the opportunity of a lighter sentence

Don't blame him for going down that path

[BitCoinDream]

Is he actually guilty? - technically yes. Although the reason he is guilty is really only because he did not reasonably gather the identity of the people he was selling bitcoin to. If he made a better effort to gain the identity of his buyers of bitcoin then he would not be guilty. The government really has him on nothing more then a technicality.

Thats actually not what my alleged crimes were. We have the identities of everyone. The prosecution alleges that I "with intent, promoted silk road". They make that connection by my alleged knowledge that a very small % of BitInstant Bitcoin purchases were by customers who wanted to buy something on silk road.

I assume he's banned from working in the money-transmitter space.  Is he banned from operating Bitcoin businesses generally?

Nope, Im actually working for one now   http://www.coindesk.com/payza-launches-bitcoin-buying-consumers-190-countries/

He took the lesser crime to avoid a long possible sentence.
I'd think most of us, if put in his position, would be forced to do the same thing.

Yes I was facing 30 years with money laundering charges.

Wont u face problem for discussing your sentence openly in public ?

[BitCoinNutJob]

im sure he wasnt thrilled about pleading guilty

When it came down to it, he had to think about the possibility of going away for a decade or longer. Gotta think about family first, always take the sure thing and the slap on the wrist versus possibly walking away scott free, but also possibly going away for a long, long time.

Indeed you cant fight the machine single handed. Im sure in the end bitcoin will have been better off for charlie shrem contributions. 

[oceans]

I think anyone in this kind of situation would have taken any chance they had to get themselves a lighter sentence even if it meant pleading guilty. It seems this was the case and I know many of us if put into the same situation would have taken the same decision.

[Yankee (BitInstant)]

Is he actually guilty? - technically yes. Although the reason he is guilty is really only because he did not reasonably gather the identity of the people he was selling bitcoin to. If he made a better effort to gain the identity of his buyers of bitcoin then he would not be guilty. The government really has him on nothing more then a technicality.

Thats actually not what my alleged crimes were. We have the identities of everyone. The prosecution alleges that I "with intent, promoted silk road". They make that connection by my alleged knowledge that a very small % of BitInstant Bitcoin purchases were by customers who wanted to buy something on silk road.

I assume he's banned from working in the money-transmitter space.  Is he banned from operating Bitcoin businesses generally?

Nope, Im actually working for one now   http://www.coindesk.com/payza-launches-bitcoin-buying-consumers-190-countries/

He took the lesser crime to avoid a long possible sentence.
I'd think most of us, if put in his position, would be forced to do the same thing.

Yes I was facing 30 years with money laundering charges.

Wont u face problem for discussing your sentence openly in public ?

No

[Beliathon]

So what is the maximum sentence for "aiding and abetting an unlicensed money transmitter"? Seems pretty mild compared to the original charges so I am not surprised he took the deal. Unfortunately this also means that a court won't be considering the legality of a company like BitInstant. From what I remembered they'd made some effort to remain legit.

max for his charge is 5 years, but he won't get sentenced to that.

[QuestionAuthority]

Is he actually guilty? - technically yes. Although the reason he is guilty is really only because he did not reasonably gather the identity of the people he was selling bitcoin to. If he made a better effort to gain the identity of his buyers of bitcoin then he would not be guilty. The government really has him on nothing more then a technicality.

Thats actually not what my alleged crimes were. We have the identities of everyone. The prosecution alleges that I "with intent, promoted silk road". They make that connection by my alleged knowledge that a very small % of BitInstant Bitcoin purchases were by customers who wanted to buy something on silk road.

I assume he's banned from working in the money-transmitter space.  Is he banned from operating Bitcoin businesses generally?

Nope, Im actually working for one now   http://www.coindesk.com/payza-launches-bitcoin-buying-consumers-190-countries/

He took the lesser crime to avoid a long possible sentence.
I'd think most of us, if put in his position, would be forced to do the same thing.

Yes I was facing 30 years with money laundering charges.

Thanks for dropping in Charlie. I knew you would. I read a Reddit thread that was accusing you of all kinds of horrible things that I knew weren't true and I wanted to give you a chance to address them if you could and not jeopardize your case. Reddit's down voting system keeps good answers at the bottom and lies at the top. Besides I don't think anyone would believe it was you on Reddit.

All of the questions in the OP were gleaned from that Reddit post. Can you address some of them without compromising your case? Do you believe you were just in the wrong place at the right time because they were investigating Silk Road already? Obviously you have the insider info I was talking about. Do you think your prosecution was meant to make the rest of us behave? Should we fear NY as a place to do business (are they gunning for us)? I know Coinbase already put the application in for a Bitlicense in NY. Should they withdraw it? (keep 49 states and give up on that one?)

[clemahieu]

What would you recommend people do to avoid being in the same situation?

Is he actually guilty? - technically yes. Although the reason he is guilty is really only because he did not reasonably gather the identity of the people he was selling bitcoin to. If he made a better effort to gain the identity of his buyers of bitcoin then he would not be guilty. The government really has him on nothing more then a technicality.

Thats actually not what my alleged crimes were. We have the identities of everyone. The prosecution alleges that I "with intent, promoted silk road". They make that connection by my alleged knowledge that a very small % of BitInstant Bitcoin purchases were by customers who wanted to buy something on silk road.

I assume he's banned from working in the money-transmitter space.  Is he banned from operating Bitcoin businesses generally?

Nope, Im actually working for one now   http://www.coindesk.com/payza-launches-bitcoin-buying-consumers-190-countries/

He took the lesser crime to avoid a long possible sentence.
I'd think most of us, if put in his position, would be forced to do the same thing.

Yes I was facing 30 years with money laundering charges.

[tins]

I think anyone in this kind of situation would have taken any chance they had to get themselves a lighter sentence even if it meant pleading guilty. It seems this was the case and I know many of us if put into the same situation would have taken the same decision.

Especially anybody with a family...imagine having to go decades without seeing those people you hold most dear in your life.

[Beliathon]

I think anyone in this kind of situation would have taken any chance they had to get themselves a lighter sentence even if it meant pleading guilty. It seems this was the case and I know many of us if put into the same situation would have taken the same decision.

Especially anybody with a family...imagine having to go decades without seeing those people you hold most dear in your life.

I'd rather be dead. I'm not alone.